Media professionals issue recommendations on covering terrorism

Professionals in the field of journalism discussed what they described as "unprofessional coverage" by Egyptian media of recent terror attacks, providing recommendations on how coverage of such topics can be improved during a Cairo media conference on Wednesday.

The conference, entitled “Media and Confronting Terrorism”, was organized by Egyptian Media Production City (EMPC), the main state broadcaster, and in cooperation with the Arab Organization For Dialogue & International Cooperation (AICO).

The conference began with an opening speech by Osama Heikal, the CEO of EMPC. He stated that the purpose of the conference is to confront media problems in Egypt, especially concerning the war on terrorism.

The conference also submitted recommendations that will be submitted to President Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi.

Egyptian Radio and Television Union head, Essam El-Amir, said that conferences of this type are important to assess the media's status.

“There is a fine line between covering terrorism news and propagating ideologies of terroristic groups,” El-Amir added, referring to a number of instances where media have aired Islamic State propaganda and videos of beheadings.

In a statement to Ahram Online, El-Amir also emphasised the importance of three councils aimed at regulating the Egyptian media which are mandated in the new constitution.

They include the Higher Council for Regulating Media, the National Commission for Audiovisual Media, and the National Commission for state journalism.

These three councils are required by the new constitution, but can only be established once a new Egyptian parliament is elected.

Among the attendees was Yehia Qallash, head of Egypt's Journalists Syndicate, who said that freedom of the press is parallel to the freedom of the people. He added that journalists and heads of media should receive training on how to properly cover reports of terrorism.

Attendees discussed what they described as unprofessional coverage of the recent terror attacks in Sinai. Egyptian media faced criticism following this coverage due to contradictions in the numbers of victims.

A draft terrorism law has recently been considered and it includes controversial article 33 that states that journalists publishing articles on terror attacks that are not aligned with official statements will face up to two years in prison. Reporting on the conflict in North Sinai is extremely difficult for journalists, who usually rely on reports from locals.

At the end of the conference, Heikal listed the major recommendations that participants came up with, which included making a framework for media to deal with crises and training junior journalists and media executives.

Ahram Online welcomes readers' comments on all issues covered by the site, along with any criticisms and/or corrections. Readers are asked to limit their feedback to a maximum of 1000 characters (roughly 200 words). All comments/criticisms will, however, be subject to the following code

We will not publish comments which contain rude or abusive language, libelous statements,
slander and personal attacks against any person/s.

We will not publish comments which contain racist remarks or any kind of racial
or religious incitement against any group of people, in Egypt or outside it.

We welcome criticism of our reports and articles but we will not publish personal
attacks, slander or fabrications directed against our reporters and contributing
writers.

We reserve the right to correct, when at all possible, obvious errors in spelling
and grammar. However, due to time and staffing constraints such corrections will
not be made across the board or on a regular basis.

Please Wait

1

Noir

30-07-2015 10:15pm

36-

39+

“REGULATING” the Egyptian media

The Constitution driving or “regulating” media is an honorable goal, as long as (a) the constitution is designed with liberty in mind, and (b) the media is responsible enough to operate within the bounds of the constitution. This relationship is best found in Europe and the US where this relationship is described as YES to “FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION” and NO to “HATE SPEECH” any other “regulating” beyond these 2 parameters is simply “MUZZLING THE MEDIA”. Perhaps the conference time would be better spent defining these 2 boundaries and submit a proposal to the President!